seg-v in 4 lines (DMD 0.160 Linux/XP)

Jun 16, 2006

BCS

Jun 29, 2006

Thomas Kuehne

Jun 29, 2006

Jun 29, 2006

Jun 29, 2006

Jun 30, 2006

Jun 30, 2006

<code> void main() { switch(1) { // case 0: // compiles with this line scope(exit) *cast(int*)null = 0; default: } } </code> C:\...>dmd -v seg_v_1.d parse seg_v_1 semantic seg_v_1 semantic2 seg_v_1 semantic3 seg_v_1 code seg_v_1 generating code for function 'main' seg-v

June 29, 2006

Re: seg-v in 4 lines (DMD 0.160 Linux/XP)

Posted by Thomas Kuehne
in reply to BCS

Permalink

Thomas Kuehne

Posted in reply to BCS

Attachments:

pgp.sig

Permalink

BCS schrieb am 2006-06-16:
><code>
> void main()
> {
> 	switch(1)
> 	{
> //		case 0:	// compiles with this line
> 			scope(exit) *cast(int*)null = 0;
> 		default:
> 	}
> }
></code>
>
> C:\...>dmd -v seg_v_1.d
> parse     seg_v_1
> semantic  seg_v_1
> semantic2 seg_v_1
> semantic3 seg_v_1
> code      seg_v_1
> generating code for function 'main'
>
> seg-v

Added to DStress as http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_A.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_B.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_C.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_D.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_E.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_F.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_G.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_I.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_J.d

switch_22_A is nasty:
> ==10236== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> ==10236==    at 0x804A0D3: _Dmain (run/s/switch_22_A.d:17)
> ==10236==    by 0x804B2BE: main (in ./run/s/switch_22_A.d.exe)

Thomas

Thomas Kuehne wrote: > > > Added to DStress as > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_A.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_B.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_C.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_D.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_E.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_F.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_G.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_I.d > http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_J.d > "It is illegal for a GotoStatement to be used to skip initializations." How does this effect the legality of these test cases. For that matter how do I determine if a test case is considered to be legal? I would expect that "A" would be illegal because of this. I think that the actions of the rest are not specified.

BCS schrieb am 2006-06-29: > Thomas Kuehne wrote: >> >> >> Added to DStress as http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_A.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_B.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_C.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_D.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_E.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_F.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_G.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_I.d http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/s/switch_22_J.d >> > > "It is illegal for a GotoStatement to be used to skip initializations." > > How does this effect the legality of these test cases. For that matter how do I determine if a test case is considered to be legal? legal: http://dstress.kuehne.cn/compile/ http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/ illegal: http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/ http://dstress.kuehne.cn/norun/ Those in http://dstress.kuehne.cn/complex/ are "complex" tests. > I would expect that "A" would be illegal because of this. Fixed. > I think that the actions of the rest are not specified. Replace scope with writefln("activate scope X"); and analyse again. Thomas

Thomas Kuehne wrote: > BCS schrieb am 2006-06-29: > >>I think that the actions of the rest are not specified. > > Replace scope with writefln("activate scope X"); and analyse again. > <code> import std.stdio; void main() { goto skip; scope(exit) head: writef("exit\n"); skip: writef("exiting\n"); } </code> scope.d(6): cannot goto forward into different try block level Yet the latter test cases allow the skipping of scope statements using a switch. OTOH the scope statements do get executed as if they weren't skipped. Both of these actions are, as far as I can tell, undocumented. I don't know what should be the defined action but this just seems odd.

Forums